More info about an eventual 64 Edition

[Guest]

There's a good reason for lots of memory, and that can be summed up as "no swap file". You don't realize that you may indeed be using more than 3 gig of memory when running your system, because some of the memory you're using may be "virtual memory". Pages of memory may be swapped out to your hard disk as you load and run more than one large app on a desktop that itself is rather "heavy". Especially if you're working with large, and/or lots of, media files (as I do), that can make the swap file kick in fairly early.

And swapping pages to/from disk incurs a performance penalty.

The other problem with Linux is that it has a "process killer" that will abruptly terminate running software if it runs out of RAM plus swap space. So, if you're going to turn off the swap file, you definitely need that extra RAM for safety.

[Acid7711]

The other problem with Linux is that it has a "process killer" that will abruptly terminate running software if it runs out of RAM plus swap space.

What you call a 'problem' I call proactive problem solving. Can you imagine the amount of overflows that could occur if these checks and balances didn't exist?

[belovedmonster]

OK, I'm confused... I actually like Vista...

Have you ever tried OSX? Its got all the polish and neat features found in Vista (and more), cept unlike Vista it doesn't suck! Mark Shuttleworth himself has gone as far as to say that OSX is leading the way and Linux should aspire to equal OSX rather than Windows in terms of polish and features.

I realise this is entirely off topic, but seeing you are impressed with Vista the first thing that jumped into my mind was "well if he thinks Vista is pretty neat wait till he tries OSX".

[cyphur]

After reading these 3 pages, I've decided to finally chime in on this forum. FIrst off, this forum has been great as I've recently installed Mint 4.0 XFCE and this community is great re: support. Thanks for that!


Most Windows users, the typical desktop users, that Mint(from what I can tell) is trying to target, will soon be running 64-bit systems. It's inevitable as the chips have been out long enough that many folks are starting to upgrade to them(or already have). Add this to the fact that Windows also continuously requires more hardware capacity to ensure a stable and pleasant experience, hardware manufacturers will continue to bend to this fact as it is inescapable. Easier to charge more for extra RAM, then to attempt to educate consumers in the art of system optimization.

As such, if you are targeting these folks, and you want to make a good first impression, then a few points -

Why not build a system that is optimal for them? 32bit isn't, anymore. Core2Duo is almost the de-facto new standard for mid-range computers, even more so for performance desktops(which is what everyone wants, due to the consumerism you mentioned). Why develop an inferior product?

Also, polish needs to be increased. ESPECIALLY in the areas of fonts and windows rendering. Consumers WANT the eye-candy Vista has to offer - it's the hardcore users that generally ditch it for performance. I have Vista Home Premium on a new Dell laptop and it is truly a pleasure to look at. I wish Linux could achieve that! I use OSX fonts on my current Mint XFCE install as I found the original fonts unsatisfactory(beautiful thing about Linux - it allows me to do that!).


In the end - I hate Microsoft's need to control everything, and over-charge for bloated products which require better hardware, but it's hard to argue with the fact that they control most of the market, and with Vista, they put out an aesthetically pleasing OS. To take some of the better points of Vista would not be a mistake - especially the 64-bit integration. However, there is much to learn from OSX as well.


64-bit IS the future, whether you like it or not. Also, with RAM prices dropping, more and more programmers will sacrifice code optimizations for time crunches and bottom dollar(especially on the Windows side). Also, more folks will WANT more RAM simply because everyone says more is better(with RAM, it's true!). I just built a new system, and it has 4GB of RAM. Do I always need it? No. Do I run applications that will utilize it? Yes, and more than once a week.

I look forward to a 64-bit version of Mint. I'd like to eventually replace Windows for everything(including gaming), but until then, they will co-exist on my hard drives.

[Acid7711]

I have Vista Home Premium on a new Dell laptop and it is truly a pleasure to look at. I wish Linux could achieve that!

I dunknow about you, but after running CFusion for a heck of a long time, then using the Vista machine at work, I'm not impressed at all. Slowly rendered windows bog the entire system, the effects are VERY limited, etc. What does Vista have in it's added "bling" that CFusion doesn't? I'm not saying it's bad, just that everything isn't all that inferior to Vista in that aspect alone, and it's not all that inovative.



Beryl/Compiz were both doing the exact same stuff Vista has "introduced" for years before (lots more now).... All of a sudden Vista comes out, and everyone poops themselves acting like it's new, never before seen territory.



And I would love to see a system log of your weekly activities that fully utilize 4gigs of ram + swap on a desktop computer. I could see this on a all-out multimedia crunching computer setup for buisness/movie making/etc, but for daily desktop use? Please. People are too caught up and ram-happy now a days to realize that the core cpu clocks/fsb limit the raw processing power of the system. It's been that way since the battles of the ghz between AMD and Intel years ago. Consumers are stupid. When a company boasts higher speeds, regardless of being true or not, people go crazy and automatically think it's "faster" and "better" based solely upon what they're blindly believing from an unreliable, biased, source.

In the end, it won't matter because you believe what you're told from whomever, and that's the end of it.

[molom]

This is one thing I don't know much about. I heard 64bit OS's are good for servers because it can carry more the 8 gig of ram and so on. But, what are the benefits of a 64bit edition for a desktop computer?

[cmost]

While I would absolutely love an amd64 port of Linux Mint, I must contribute my $0.02 and say that the stock Linux Mint 32 bit performs well with 4 GB of RAM, provided you install the server version of the kernel instead of the 386 or generic versions. The server version of the kernel (available in the repos) has been compiled to recognize more than 3 GB of RAM, and this DOES NOT slow down the system as another poster reported.

[cyphur]

I have Vista Home Premium on a new Dell laptop and it is truly a pleasure to look at. I wish Linux could achieve that!

I dunknow about you, but after running CFusion for a heck of a long time, then using the Vista machine at work, I'm not impressed at all. Slowly rendered windows bog the entire system, the effects are VERY limited, etc. What does Vista have in it's added "bling" that CFusion doesn't? I'm not saying it's bad, just that everything isn't all that inferior to Vista in that aspect alone, and it's not all that inovative.

Agreed - Linux has been doing desktop effects for a good while, I was referring to the polish of the system. Font rendering especially. I'm what I consider a linux newb(I've run several distros in the past, but haven't run it as my main OS since the late 90s when I had Mandrake), so when I load up the distro and I have to tweak a bunch of stuff to get it to look nice, I find that as "lacking" from a consumer perspective. Yes I can fix it, and have on my system - but for desktop replacement, that needs to work out of the box. Just my observations so far...

And I would love to see a system log of your weekly activities that fully utilize 4gigs of ram + swap on a desktop computer. I could see this on a all-out multimedia crunching computer setup for buisness/movie making/etc, but for daily desktop use? Please. People are too caught up and ram-happy now a days to realize that the core cpu clocks/fsb limit the raw processing power of the system. It's been that way since the battles of the ghz between AMD and Intel years ago. Consumers are stupid. When a company boasts higher speeds, regardless of being true or not, people go crazy and automatically think it's "faster" and "better" based solely upon what they're blindly believing from an unreliable, biased, source.

In the end, it won't matter because you believe what you're told from whomever, and that's the end of it.

I run a Cisco hardware emulator, dynamips/dynagen, as a tool for professional development and configuration testing. Depending on my lab configuration and the number of devices I am simulating and the protocols they are running, it is fairly easy for me to consume 2GB of physical RAM or more when configured for optimal performance.

Is that a typical desktop use? For me it is, so the RAM is justified in my eyes, to allow me to run that software suite as well as my normal programs.

Thanks for assuming I am a stupid consumer, though. If Mint wants to become a true desktop replacement OS - it's those "stupid consumers" it's targeting.

[Acid7711]

I run a Cisco hardware emulator, dynamips/dynagen, as a tool for professional development and configuration testing. Depending on my lab configuration and the number of devices I am simulating and the protocols they are running, it is fairly easy for me to consume 2GB of physical RAM or more when configured for optimal performance.

Thanks for assuming I am a stupid consumer, though. If Mint wants to become a true desktop replacement OS - it's those "stupid consumers" it's targeting.

Well, that in my eyes at least, isn't a typical desktop computer. A typical desktop computer is one that a grandmother at home is busy using, single clicking internet explorer and getting angry because it's not coming up. Personally, what you're doing with your "desktop" computer is far beyond the generalized scope that defines "desktop". I'd classify that as related to business since it's used for all your "professional development" as you say. And yes, I do believe Mint targets the general consumer, but if you want to take an extremely broad generalization about 99% of the public usually using a somewhat outdated desktop computer used solely for email, internet browsing, and digital picture/music stuff and place yourself into it then blame me for doing so, go ahead if it helps you sleep better at night. My statements were broad depictions of the general public, not the business world. Until I see a 64 bit Mint released, I'll leave you to argue your case amongst others here in this tread cuzz I really couldn't care less either way.




Annnnyways, back on topic. I too would enjoy to see a Mint 64. I wouldn't figure it to be too hard to take Ubuntu 64 and plop a couple recompiled tools/unique things that are in Mint to get a solid base to start with.

[linuxviolin]

acid7711 I'm OK with you about the desktop home user, the general consumer...

the fact that Windows also continuously requires more hardware capacity to ensure a stable and pleasant experience

hmm Windows is a model?

Why develop an inferior product?

No, just the product necessary for our current needs

Consumers WANT the eye-candy Vista has to offer

NO. Consumers want what we want to make them believe they need. Thanks to the hype advertising, the so-called 'informations' etc

64-bit IS the future, whether you like it or not.

Maybe, unfortunately...

[sundayrefugee]

While I would love a 64-bit Edition, I have to chime in about eye-candy.

I hates it. It makes my system less stable, uses resources (yes, with a dual-core, 2 gigs of RAM, and a GeForce card, I know I have plenty to spare, but that's not the point), and doesn't do anything productive for me. The fascination of seeing my desktop spin around like a cube wore off after about 13 seconds. I don't need it. I'd rather have stability and USEFUL functionality, USEFUL, PRODUCTIVE innovation, in my DE.

Wobbly windows aren't that

[linuxviolin]

Thanks! +1! I'm with you sundayrefugee!

doesn't do anything productive for me (...) I'd rather have stability and USEFUL functionality, USEFUL, PRODUCTIVE innovation, in my DE.

Just for the record: nobody need of 3D Desktop!

[belovedmonster]

According to the Mint blog the 64bit version has been cancelled?? What gives?

[clem]

There won't be any Daryna 64bit Edition but we're planning one for Elyssa.

Clem.

[cmost]

There won't be any Daryna 64bit Edition but we're planning one for Elyssa.

Clem.

cmost salivates!!!

[sundayrefugee]

There won't be any Daryna 64bit Edition but we're planning one for Elyssa.

Clem.

Can the Mint tools simply be recompiled in 64-bit?

[cmost]

Can the Mint tools simply be recompiled in 64-bit?

I'm sure they could be but Clem could just as easily decide to use the 32bit tools as is? In my experience, 32 bit programs run just fine on 64 bit Linux variants. Such things are only critical when it comes to kernel modules and the like.

[sundayrefugee]

Can the Mint tools simply be recompiled in 64-bit?

I'm sure they could be but Clem could just as easily decide to use the 32bit tools as is? In my experience, 32 bit programs run just fine on 64 bit Linux variants. Such things are only critical when it comes to kernel modules and the like.

Or if you want a distro completely free of any ia-32 libs It would be kind of neat to have that, if possible

[drifter0000]

[quote="clem"]OK, I'm confused... I actually like Vista...

I started with Mint 4.0 and now I use Mint 5.0
I have also used hardy 8.04 64 bit quite alot....using there guides for setting up your system in the forums I dont find any problems with hardy 64 bit at all.

I use Mint because I play poker in Wine and need to hear the sound while I stream audio or play MP3. This is much easier to set up in Mint by default. Also I find Mint 4 and 5 to be more polished than hardy.

Now, I dont no anything at all about servers. That said I downloaded free trial of Windows server 2008 to see how Vista Ultimate would run on my machine. I just cant run out and spend a few hundred on an operating system.

I took 20 minutes trying to set it up like a desktop workstation and turned on all the Vista Eye candy that I could find. I also downloaded beta version of Firefox 64 bit edition. I opened 3 windows with eye candy turned on in 2008 server then opened firefox and opened 20 random tabs. The only flash they were playing was just the ads no movies.

The results were that it used almost the identical resources that Mint uses. And it seemed quite responsive while using for a couple hours.

So I have to say on my machine it runs pretty fast compared to XP Pro 32 bit or Linux 32-64 bit.

I just dont trust microsoft operating system anylonger since I stopped using XP Pro. But I have to agree with Clem. It seems quick, uses less resources (super fetch was turned off) and ran quite well on my machine

Linux just seems to manage memory better than Microsoft OS

My Machine is:

Socket 939 Amd 64 running at 2.4 ghz
DDR 400mhz 2gig
Nvidia 6200 Agp x8 with 256mb ram

[waspbr]

I used to have linux mint in my computer and I gotta say I really liked it, although the fact that there's no 64 bit version is a little off putting. I have a 32 bit desktop and a new 64 bit laptop, where I run ubuntu in both (don't do distro hopping with my desktop). Anyway I had to stop using LM in my laptop cos at least for what I do I need a 64 bit OS. I had to run a few simulation programs and on a 32 bit system each iteration took about 5-6 min, while in the 64 bit it took around 4 minutes. When you have about hundreds of iterations to run the extra power becomes very noticeable.

So for the mean time I am going to have to sitck with hardy 8.04 amd64, that is until the is a mint64.